DOCSLIB.ORG

Logic and the Condemnations of 1277

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Logic and the Condemnations of 1277 View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by CiteSeerX Logic and the condemnations of 1277 Sara L. Uckelman† †Institute for Logic, Language, and Computation Plantage Muidergracht 24 1018TV Amsterdam, The Netherlands +31 20 525 5361 (phone) +31 20 525 5206 (fax) [email protected] November 13, 2008 Abstract The struggle to delineate the relationship between theology and logic flourished in the thirteenth century and culminated in two condemnations in early 1277, one in Paris and the other in Oxford. To see how much and what kind of affect ecclessiastical actions such as condemnations and prohibitions to teach had on the development of logic in the Middle Ages, we investigate the events leading up to the 1277 actions, the condemned propositions, and the parts of these condemnations connected to modal and temporal logic specifically. We show that because of the specific mo- tivations late 13th-century and 14th-century logicians had when working in modal and temporal logic, the effect of the 1277 condemnations on the development of those branches was much smaller than might have been supposed. Keywords: modal logic, temporal logic, Oxford condemnation, Paris condemnation, Robert Kilwardby, Stephen Tempier 1 Preliminary remarks A 21st-century logician who is interested in the societal factors which affect the development of various branches of logic cannot help but notice that one of the biggest differences between logic as it is currently practiced and logic as it was practiced in the Middle Ages is the role of the Church. Problems in theology have very little influence on modern logic, whereas medieval logicians were often trained theologians and those who were not were still connected to the Church via the Church’s role in everyday life and its connections to the university and academic life. As a result, it is natural to ask whether there were specific actions of the Church which altered the development of logic in the Middle Ages. One looking for clear examples of theological issues affecting medieval logic might think he need look no further than condemnations and prohibitions by Church authorities of the teaching and dissemination of certain logical doctrines, for surely the charge of heresy and the threat of excommunication would have had some effect on logicians’ choice of theories. 1 In this paper we look at various 13th-century condemnations propounded at the universities of Paris and Oxford, focusing on the largest and perhaps most well known, that of Stephen Tempier, bishop of Paris, in 1277, with additional attention to that of Robert Kilwardby, archbishop of Canterbury, also in 1277. Since their 700th anniversary in 1977, these condemnations have received ex- tensive attention from historians and scholars of medieval philosophy, but with a few exceptions, these historians have focused primarily on the parts of the condemnations that connect to natural philosophy and to science.1 We are interested here in the condemnations with respect to their connec- tions to logic and dialectic. We begin by locating the historical facts of these condemnations, and provide some overview of previous literature discussing the condemnations. Next we turn to a discussion of events leading up to the con- demnations, as well as of the general intellectual and academic features which played a role in these events. We then look at the condemned propositions themselves, focusing on those which treat with specifically logical matters, the role of logic or philosophy in theological reasoning, or the nature and structure of time. After discussing these propositions of logical interest, we briefly sur- vey the documented effects of the condemnations, and finally, draw conclusions about how these condemnations affected and guided the development of logic, with special attention to the development of modal and temporal logic, in the end of the thirteenth century and into fourteenth century. We begin with an introduction to the condemnations themselves. The propo- sitions which were condemned and that they were condemned are perhaps the only clear facts of the situation. Less clear are the motives of their condemn- ers, Stephen Tempier, Bishop of Paris, and Robert Kilwardby, Archbishops of Canterbury (did he undertake the condemnation on his own? Was he acting on a papal mandate?), who was targeted by the condemnation (was anyone? Was it just scholars in the Arts Faculty at Paris? Was it Aquinas?), and what effect the condemnation had in the following centuries (was there any? Did this signal the strength of the stranglehold of the Church upon science? Was this the birth of modern science?). Many of these questions simply cannot be answered given the available evidence. But in order to discuss the impact that this condem- nation had on the development of logic, in the next section we briefly consider some of these questions and the arguments in support of different answers. 1.1 The condemnation in Paris On 7 March 1277, the third anniversary of the death of St. Thomas Aquinas, Stephen Tempier, bishop of Paris, issued the condemnation of 219 errors of theology, natural philosophy, and logic.2 In addition to the 219 propositions, 1For example, Murdoch in [Mu98] says explicitly that he addresses the effects of the con- demnations only with regard to natural philosophy, and not theology or philosophy in general (p. 111). Perhaps the most well-known modern comment on the condemnations is the claim by Pierre Duhem that Tempier’s censure gave birth to modern science. See [Du06–13] and [Du13–59]; and [Mu91] for further discussion. Others, on the other hand, argue that, e.g. “the effects of the condemnation of 1277 were narrow and largely ignored” [Go06, p. 43]. See also [Gr79] and [Gr96]. 2The condemnations are printed in [CUP, I, pp. 543–61]. The propositions were reprinted in a different order in [Man08], and the first serious extensive systematic historical and doctrinal study of the articles is [Hi77]. 2 Tempier also condemned two specific texts, De amore or De deo armoris3 and a book of geomancy with the incipit Existimaverunt Indi, and any tract dealing with necromancy, invocations of the devil, incantations which may endanger lives, or fortune telling. Anyone teaching, defending, upholding, or even listening to any of these propositions who did not turn themselves in to ecclesiastical authority within seven days faced excommunication and any other punishment as required by the nature of the offense [FoO’N, p. 337]. We start our discussion of the condemnation by presenting the standard view of the events leading up to Tempier’s 7 March condemnation. On 18 January 1277, Pope John XXI4 wrote to Tempier saying that he had heard rumors of errors circulating within Paris, and charging him with investigating these rumors and reporting on them to him: Episcopo Parisiensi. Relatio nimis implacida nostrum nuper turbavit auditum, amaricavit et animum, quod Parisiis, ubi fons vivus sapi- entie salutaris abundanter hucusque scaturiit, suos rivos limpidissi- mos, fidem patefacientes catholicam usque ad terminos orbis terrae diffundens, quidam errores in prejudicium ejusdem fidei de novo pul- lulasse dicuntur. Volumus itaque tibique auctoritate presentium dis- tricte precipiendo mandamus, quatinus diligenter facias inspici, vel inquiri a quibus personis et in quibus locis errores hujusmodi dicti sunt sive scripti, et que didiceris sive inveneris, conscripta fideliter, nobis per tuum nuntium transmittere quam citius non omittas. — Dat. Viterbii, xv kalendas februarii, anno primo [Cad92, p. 51].5 The traditional view is that this letter was the instigation for Tempier’s con- demnation.6 Assuming that the letter took a month to travel from Viterbo to Paris7, this means that Bishop Tempier created his list of erroneous propositions and suspect texts in just over two weeks, and issued his condemnation without waiting for the list to be ratified by the pope.8 This short interval, and the im- petuosity it implies on Tempier’s part, are cited as explanations for the evident lack of systematicity and the seeming haphazardness in the construction of the 3[Bia98, p. 91], [Thi03, §3], and [Wip03, p. 65] identify the author of this text as Andreas Cappellanus or Capellanus. 4This pope is the one originally known as Petrus Hispanus, and is perhaps identical with the Petrus Hispanus Portugalensis who was the author of a Summula Logicales. 5“To the bishop of Paris. An exceedingly worrisome relation has recently disturbed our hearing and excited our mind, that in Paris, where hitherto the living font of salutary wisdom has been lavishly spreading its most clear streams showing the Catholic faith all the way to the ends of the earth, certain errors in judgment of that very faith are said to have sprung forth anew. And so we desire you, being strictly instructed by the authority of these presents, and we command that you should diligently cause to be inspected or inquired by which people and in which places the errors of this kind are spoken or written, and whatever you may hear about or find, you should not omit to faithfully write them down, to be transmitted to us through your messenger as quickly as possible. — dated by Viterbo, 18 January, in the first year.” 6[Cal55, p. 11]; [Gr96, p. 71]; [Kno42, p. 184]; [Thi97a, p. 92]; [Wip95b, §4]. 7Thijssen in [Thi97a, p. 93, fn. 29] says that “According to Robert Wielockx in Aegidii Romani Opera Omnia, vol. 3, pt. 1, Apologia. correspondence from the papal court to Paris took about a month to arrive.” 8Note that in most cases, this would not be remarkable; Thijssen in [Thi98] indicates that many cases of censure, especially in the 13th century, only reached the pope on appeal. However, if the traditional view is correct, that the condemnation was triggered by the papal letter, this fact is remarkable given the request of Pope John that Tempier send him a list of the problematic theses.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Book Reviews
    BOOK REVIEWS THE NEW TESTAMENT OF OUR LORD AND SAVIOR JESUS CHRIST: RE­ VISED STANDARD VERSION—CATHOLIC EDITION. Prepared by the Catholic Biblical Association of Great Britain. Collegeville, Minn.: St. John's Abbey, 1965. Pp. 250. $3.50. With the publication of the NT in the Catholic edition of the Protestant Revised Standard Version (RSV), and the preparation of the OT in the same edition, English-speaking Catholics throughout the world will finally have a whole Bible translated from the original languages. Most of them will not realize at first what this means and it will take them some time to get used to it. But the boon that this publication represents is beyond estimate. The RSV is justly famed as the latest revision of the English translation of the Bible first published in England in 1611. That "Authorized Version" (AV), commonly called in this country the King James Version (KJV), was first modernized in the "Revised Version" (RV) of 1881 (the NT) and 1885 (the OT). This revision strove to introduce as few alterations as possible into the text of the KJV, and sought to be faithful to the original and con­ sistent with current English usage. Yet, the revisers did introduce the prin­ ciple of using, as far as possible, the same English word or phrase for the same Greek or Hebrew. The RV was widely criticized for years, despite the care with which it was produced. Then in 1901 some American scholars who had co-operated in the RV brought out an amended edition called the "American Standard Version" (ASV).
    [Show full text]
  • The Movement of the Free Spirit
    The Movement of the Free Spirit Raoul Vaneigem General Considerations and Firsthand Testimony Concerning Some Brief Flowerings of Life in the Middle Ages, the Renaissance and, Incidentally, Our Own Time ZONE BOOKS ' NEW YORK UHIB The publisher would like to thank Donald Nicholson-Smith for his assistance in the production of this book. Ian Patterson would like to thank Dr. James Simpson, of Robinson Col­ lege, Cambridge, for his generous help with the translation of Margaret Porete's French. © 1994 Urzone, Inc. ZONE BOOKS 611 Broadway, Suite 60S New York, NY 10012 First Paperback Edition All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, includ­ ing electronic, mechanical, photocopying, microfilming, recording or otherwise (except for that copying permitted by Sections 107 and lOS of the u.S. Copyright Law and except by reviewers for the public press) without written permission from the Publisher. Originally published in France as Le Mouvement du libre-esprit © 19S6 Editions Ramsay. Printed in the United States of America. Distributed by The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, and London, England Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Vaneigem, Raoul, 1934- [Mouvement du Libre-Esprit. English] The Movement of the Free Spirit: general considerations and firsthand testimony concerning some brief flowerings of life in the Middle Ages, the Renaissance and, incidentally, our own time / Raoul Vaneigem; translated by Randall Cherry and Ian Patterson. p. cm. Tr anslation of: Mouvement du Libre-Esprit. Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 0-942299-71-X I. Brethren of the Free Spirit.
    [Show full text]
  • The Theology of the Res Et Sacramentum with Particular Emphasis on Its Application to Penance
    THE THEOLOGY OF THE RES ET SACRAMENTUM WITH PARTICULAR EMPHASIS ON ITS APPLICATION TO PENANCE SALVATION THROUGH THE COMMUNITY Basic to Jewish-Christian tradition is the belief that man is saved in and through the community. The ancient Hebrew "could not make his unique answer to God as an isolated individual." 1 If he was to live at all, he had to be one with the community, one with the people of God. To be separated from the community was death. To be restored to the community was life. Similarly, the early Christian did not believe that he could have access to God apart from the community. But for him the community was the new people of God, the body of Christ which is the Church. "For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body" (1 Cor. 12:13). Separa- tion from this body was death. Reconciliation to the body was life. For outside the body there is no salvation. Thus, in the early third century Origen has the sinner ask three questions, but they are really one: "How can I who have fallen be saved? . How can I have access to God? How can I return to the Church?" 2 This idea of corporate salvation, of salvation in and through the Church, has always been foreign to Protestantism. More recently salvation has come to be regarded by many as the result of a per- sonal encounter with God, an encounter which found its highest expression in the soul of Jesus, an encounter which is the exemplar and earnest of what can happen to all of us.
    [Show full text]
  • The Double‐Edged Sword of Interdict: Some More Warnings from History
    THE DOUBLE‐EDGED SWORD OF INTERDICT: SOME MORE WARNINGS FROM HISTORY Marshall Crossnoe I would like to begin with a claim that I have heard or read in one form or another for almost thirty years. The claim is this: “Church history teaches that whenever Christian thinkers baptize philosophy, they compromise the Christian faith.” That claim is the church historian’s version of St. Paul’s warning, “see to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy.” It is the church historian’s answer to Tertullian’s famous rhetorical question, “What does Jerusalem have to do with Athens?” It is a “history of doctrine take” on the perennial conflict between faith and reason, a take that Adolph Harnack exploited to great and lasting effect in History of Doctrine, and the one that Etienne Gilson challenged in his famous little book entitled Faith and Reason. The claim reminds me of interdict. Interdict is the censure that bishops of Rome have been using since the ninth century.1 By means of interdict, popes interrupt participation in holy things. It typically takes the form of denying someone or some group access to the Divine Liturgy, the sacraments, Christian burial, or other means of grace. The claim regarding what church history teaches is a call to interdict philosophy. If church history teaches that whenever Christian thinkers baptize philosophy, they compromise the Christian faith, then we should have nothing to do with philosophy. We should withhold baptism from it. I do not believe that is a good idea. T he interdiction of philosophy is a double-edged sword.
    [Show full text]
  • Systematic Theology 1 Systematic Theology: Task and Methods
    Systematic Theology 1 Systematic Theology: Task and Methods Francis Schüssler Fiorenza Fragility of Theology 3 Christian Scriptures: Testimony and Theological Reflection 5 Three Classic Paradigms of Theology 6 Augustine: Christian Doctrine as Wisdom 7 Beginning of Systematic Theology in the Greek Church 7 Augustine’s Scientific Conception: Knowledge and Wisdom 8 Augustine’s Hermeneutical Rules 9 Augustine’s influence on the West 11 Aquinas: Scholastic Method and Thomas’s Sacra Doctrina 13 Background to Scholastic Method and Theology 14 Thomas’s Understanding of Sacra Doctrina 15 Basis and Subject Matter of Sacra Doctrina 17 Neo-Scholasticism: Its Distinctive Characteristics 20 From Scholasticism to Post-Tridentine Catholicism 20 Baroque Scholasticism 21 Neo-Scholastic Theology 22 Crisis of Neo-Scholastic Theology 25 Summary 26 Five Contemporary Approaches to Theology 26 Transcendental Theology 26 The Turn to the Subject in Modern Theology 27 Karl Rahner’s Transcendental Phenomenology 28 1 Systematic Theology 30 2 Comparison between Aquinas and Rahner Beyond Transcendental Theology 31 Hermeneutical Theology 32 Experience and Language 33 Classics: The Authority of a Tradition 33 Beyond Hermeneutics 34 Analytical Approaches to Theology 35 Metatheory: Method in Theology 36 Models and Category Analysis 38 Beyond Metatheory 41 The Method of Correlation 41 Background 41 Correlation in Contemporary Roman Catholic Theology 42 Beyond Correlation 47 Liberation Theologies 47 Starting Point 48 Critique of Ideology 48 Subjugated Knowledge 49 Praxis
    [Show full text]
  • Providence in the Summa Halensis an Innovative Reworking of Past Masters
    Simon Maria Kopf Providenceinthe Summa Halensis: Between Authority and Innovation Abstract: The doctrine of divine providence features prominentlyinthe 13th-century earlyFranciscan Summa Halensis. This chapter argues that the account of providence presented in the Summa is an innovative reworking of past authorities and maythus be counted among the examples of earlyFranciscan innovations.For instance,while John of Damascus claimed thatprovidence is part of God’swill and Peter Lombard took providence to be aspecific form of divine knowledge,the Summa Halensis ap- plies the Boethian notion of the ratio of providence to harmonize the two authorities, termingthe corresponding executio ‘government’.Thus the distinction between prov- identia and gubernatio,socentral to Thomas Aquinas’ doctrine of providence,isto be found initiallyinthe Summa Halensis. Introduction In his historical studyofAlbert the Great’streatise on providenceand fate, which shows the dependence of Albert’streatise in the Summa theologiae sive de mirabili scientia Dei on the Summa Halensis,¹ JosefGeorgenargues thatthe rise to promi- nence of the topic of divine providence in the 13th century,inparticular,atthe Uni- versityofParis, is, apart from its intrinsic importance and value for theologygener- ally, largely afunctionofthe theological and philosophical circumstances of the mid-13th century.Inparticular, Georgen suggests that the Parisian controversy be- tween Christian and Averroistic Aristotelians goes along waytowards explaining the increased interest in the doctrine of providence,not least because it was at- tacked, in various forms, by Latin Averroists,such as SigerofBrabant,and conse- quentlyalso dealt with in some of the articles of the condemnations of 1270 and 1277.² Pierre Mandonnet,Antonin Sertillanges, and Martin Grabmann, to name just On the question of the dependnceofAlbert the Great on the Summa Halensis,see also Parthenius Minges, ‘Abhängigkeitsverhältnis zwischen Alexander vonHales und Albert dem Grossen,’ Franziska- nische Studien 2(1915), pp.
    [Show full text]
  • The Condemnations of 1270 and 1277
    BISHOPS, THEOLOGIANS, AND PHILOSOPHERS IN CONFLICT AT THE UNIVERSITIES OF PARIS AND OXFORD: THE CONDEMNATIONS OF 1270 AND 1277 In one of his letters from prison Dietrich Bonhoeffer wrote: The movement beginning about the thirteenth century (I am not going to get involved in any arguments about the exact date) towards the autonomy of man (un- der which I place the discovery of the laws by which the world lives and manages in science, social and political affairs, art, ethics and religion) has in our time reached a certain completion. Man has learned to cope with all questions of importance without recourse to God as a working hypothesis. In questions concerning science, art, and even ethics, this has become an understood thing which one scarcely dares to tilt at any more. But for the last hundred years or so it has been increasingly true of religious questions also: it is becoming evident that everything gets along without "God," and just as well as before.' Bonhoeffer's perceptive remark shows how important it is to examine our me- dieval past as well as other pasts if we are to understand our present. His allusion to the medieval movement towards human autonomy directs our attention to a number of conflicts between churchmen and theologians from the eleventh cen- tury on. We shall examine the most dramatic of these—the condemnations in 1270 and 1277 at the University of Paris by Etienne Tempier, bishop of Paris, and an almost simultaneous condemnation in 1277 at Oxford University by the Arch- bishop of Canterbury, Robert Kilwardby.
    [Show full text]
  • The First Treatment of Usury in Thomas Aquinas's Commentary on The
    Analysis risk and commercial risk: the first treatment of usury in Thomas Aquinas’s Commentary on the Sentences Pierre Januard To cite this version: Pierre Januard. Analysis risk and commercial risk: the first treatment of usury in Thomas Aquinas’s Commentary on the Sentences. 2020. halshs-02876106v2 HAL Id: halshs-02876106 https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-02876106v2 Preprint submitted on 25 Nov 2020 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution - NonCommercial - NoDerivatives| 4.0 International License Analysis risk and commercial risk: the first treatment of usury in Thomas Aquinas’s Commentary on the Sentences Pierre Januard* November 2020 Working paper Abstract Whereas literature on Thomas Aquinas’s doctrine of usury has tended to focus on the Summa Theologiae, this paper highlights the contribution of his early work the Commentary on the Sentences. In this work, Aquinas distances himself from the Roman law mutuum and the assumption of a borrower’s state of necessity, and he introduces preliminary monetary elements. He thereby paves the way for a future understanding of surplus in intertemporal exchange. The monetary loan is presented as a commercial exchange involving not only commercial risk but also the risk of analytical errors in understanding the nature of the operation.
    [Show full text]
  • From Stumbling Block to Deadly Sin: the Theology of Scandal1
    From Stumbling Block to Deadly Sin: The Theology of Scandal1 Lindsay Bryan In the spring of 2002, Pope John Paul II issued his annual Holy Thursday letter to Roman Catholic priests. The Church had recently suffered a number of very public court cases involving accusations of pedophilia against high-profile cler- ics. “Grave scandal”, the pontiff wrote, his choice of words echoing that of his medieval predecessors, “is caused” by this.2 In the spring of 2008 during his visit to the United States his successor Benedict XVI also used the word in a way that medieval clerics would have recognized when he referred to the “scan- dal given” by those who advocate access to abortion.3 While ecclesiastical administrators in the Middle Ages rarely dealt with such questions, they did have to confront other behaviours which concerned them because, among other things, of their scandal-causing potential. When we think of scandal in the twenty-first century we might associate it with the sexual misbehaviour of politicians and celebrities, or perhaps with the underhanded financial dealings of prominent business people. Our modern con- ception of scandal as outrage or shocking behaviour has been fed by mass media keen on revealing the clay feet of our idols. But when medieval people, espe- cially moral theologians, thought of scandal they saw it also as a sin, and they 1 An earlier version of this paper was given at the International Congress on Medieval Stud- ies, Kalamazoo, MI, May 11, 2008. I am grateful to Gerhard Jaritz who organized the ses- sion as well as giving a paper himself, and to Elena Lemeneva, the other participant in the session, for their stimulating conversations on this topic.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter Seven the Medieval Universities of Oxford and Paris
    John Willinsky, The Intellectual Properties of Learning: A Prehistory from Saint Jerome to John Locke (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2018). OPEN ACCESS FINAL DRAFT Chapter Seven The Medieval Universities of Oxford and Paris The “final draft” of this chapter has been made open access through a special arrangement with the University of Chicago Press, reflecting their interest in exploring the access themes raised in the book. Note that the final draft, which has benefited from rounds of peer review and revision before being accepted for publication by the press, differs at a great many points from the published text of the book. The book benefited from the press’ excellent copyediting, as well as my revisions and proofreading (with the help of colleagues) in that process. Those who are unable to obtain a copy of the published book from which to cite may wish to quote from and reference the final draft of this chapter as follows: John Willinsky, The Intellectual Properties of Learning: A Prehistory from Saint Jerome to John Locke (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2018), open access final draft, chapter 7, available from https://intellectualproperties.stanford.edu. 1 Chapter 7 The Medieval Universities of Oxford and Paris A new educational entity for advanced studies, known as the studium generale, emerged in Europe during the twelfth century. It initially arose out of the congregation of masters and scholars to be found in such centers of learning as Bologna, Paris, and Oxford. These prototypes of the medieval university formed through such an unremarkable series of steps that little or no record was left behind.
    [Show full text]
  • To Be Submitted by the Student to Th
    THE UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA IN HUNTSVILLE Honors Program HONORS SENIOR PROJECT APPROVAL FORM (To be submitted by the student to the Honors Program with a copy of the Honors Project suitable for binding. All signatures must be obtained.) Name of Candidate: Elizabeth Pollard Cottrell Department: tory Degree: Bachelor of Arts Full Title of Project: "Sacerdotium, Imperium et Studium:" Politics and the Curriculum at the University of Paris in the Thirteenth Century Approved by: I Date Honors Program Director for Honors Council D~G "SACERDOTIUM, IMPERIUM ET STUDIUMN : POLITICS AND THE CURRICULUM AT THE UNIVERSITY OF PARIS IN THE THIRTEENTH CENTURY Beth Cottrell HY 490 Dr. Carolyn White April 21, 1995 \\SACEXDOTIVM, IMPERIVM ET STUDIUMN : POLITICS AND THE CURRICULUM AT THE UNIVERSITY OF PARIS IN THE THIRTEENTH CENTURY For Alexander of Roes, writing in 1281, the priesthood, the empire, and scholarly study were the three powers, or virtues, which sustained the life and health of Christendom.' These three institutions were exemplified by the Catholic Church led by the pope in Rome, the feudal hierarchy headed by the Holy Roman Emperor and the university, especially the University of Paris. In the twelfth and thirteenth centuries western European thinkers recovered the writings of the Greek philosopher Aristotle, preserved since ancient times by the Islamic kingdoms of the near east. Historians have long viewed this rediscovery of Aristotelian teaching as a turning point in history. With Aristotelian ideas, they argued, the medieval world, steeped in Christian dogma, began the transition to the modern, secular world.2 1Hastings Rashdall, The Universities of Europe in the Middle Ages, 3 vols., eds.
    [Show full text]
  • Providence and Causality in the Summa Halensis
    CoreyL.Barnes Providenceand Causality in the Summa Halensis Abstract: William of Auvergne’streatment of providenceinhis De universo (1230s) selectively employed Avicenna, Aristotle, and the category of efficient causality to mark adistinctionbetween divine foreknowledge and providence.William’sfocus on efficiency and affirmation that natural agents work in the mode of servants fol- lows Neoplatonicimpulses to instrumentalize nature and thereby risks eviscerating anymeaningful secondary causality.Considerations of providence at Paris in the 1230s and 1240s engagewith or react to William, with the Summa Halensis providing an interesting example. The Summa Halensis counters this risk by framing provi- dence within the largerscope of divine knowledge and will, using reinterpreted ver- sions of Aristotelianformal and final causality.The Summists avoid the danger of re- ducingprovidence to predictive knowledge or to atemporal awareness of temporal events by stressing the causality of the divine intellect and will. Further,the Sum- mists counter the danger of magnifyingthe causal efficacy of providenceuntil God remains the sole agent of every effect by framing the causality of the divine intellect and will in terms of formal and final causality.Bythis approach, the Summa Halensis harmonizes providential causality with the integrity of secondary causality. The Summa Halensis begins its consideration of providence with aclear recognition that the observable world is full of confusion and disorder and with aclear affirma- tion that everythingnot
    [Show full text]